Hi, On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 7:52 AM, Carl Eugen Hoyos <ceho...@ag.or.at> wrote:
> I was under the impression that the only reason that demuxers and decoders > are written like that is that we all want FFmpeg to support invalid streams > as long as this doesn't affect valid streams. It's too broad. I want to know the origin so we know the scope of this problem. All we know is that somehow, one file came into existence and this patch fixes this one file. I have doubts that multiple of these files exist. If so, then what exactly do we gain from this "enhancement"? Our codebase is full of this crap, and it becomes harder and harder to do actual work because of these hacks. At least the baby monitor (supposedly) is a class of files. This patch doesn't fix one class, it fixes just one. And we have no idea where that one came from. You don't even seem mildly concerned that under your current assumed "rule", anyone can generate any slightly-broken file to auto-amend any decoder or demuxer in ffmpeg with any change whatsoever without concern for code validity, code cleanliness or anything else. Ronald _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
